FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8626858
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Cole v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

No. 8626858 · Decided December 8, 2006
No. 8626858 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
December 8, 2006
Citation
No. 8626858
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Rudolph Cole brought an employment discrimination action against United Parcel *585 Service (UPS) for age, race, and retaliatory discrimination in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act. Cole appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of UPS. To establish a presumption of age, race, or retaliatory discrimination, a plaintiff must present a prima facie case of discrimination. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 , 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973); Brooks v. City of San Mateo, 229 F.3d 917, 928 (9th Cir.2000); Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc., 24 Cal.4th 317, 354 , 8 P.3d 1089, 1113 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d 352, 378 (2000). Cole failed to establish a presumption of age or race discrimination because he was unable to show that he was performing his job competently or that other similarly-situated people were treated more favorably. McDonnell Douglas, 411 U.S. at 802 , 93 S.Ct. 1817 ; Guz, 24 Cal.4th at 354 , 8 P.3d at 1113 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d at 378 . He failed to establish a presumption of retaliatory discrimination because he was unable to show a causal link between his protected activity and his termination. Brooks, 229 F.3d at 928 . Even assuming Cole established a presumption of age, race, or retaliatory discrimination, UPS rebutted the presumption by providing a legitimate, nondiscriminatory explanation for Cole’s termination. See id.; Guz, 24 Cal.4th at 355 , 8 P.3d at 1114 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d at 379 . The explanation for Cole’s termination placed the burden back on Cole to present substantial evidence that the legitimate reason was pretextual. Brooks, 229 F.3d at 928 ; Guz, 24 Cal.4th at 356 , 8 P.3d at 1114 , 100 Cal.Rptr.2d at 380 . Cole did not provide substantial evidence of pretext. Because Cole was unable to proffer the necessary evidence to meet his evidentiary burdens, the district court properly granted UPS’s motion for summary judgment. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Rudolph Cole brought an employment discrimination action against United Parcel *585 Service (UPS) for age, race, and retaliatory discrimination in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Rudolph Cole brought an employment discrimination action against United Parcel *585 Service (UPS) for age, race, and retaliatory discrimination in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Cole v. United Parcel Service, Inc. in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on December 8, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8626858 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →